C172 pilot concerned with apparent lack of spacing with a PA28 in the traffic pattern at osu.

Attributes
ACN	587112
Time
Date	200307
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : osu.airport
State Reference	OH
Altitude	agl bound lower : 400 agl bound upper : 500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : osu.tower
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tower : osu.tower
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	PA-28 Cherokee/Archer II/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 48 flight time total : 2980 flight time type : 2800
ASRS Report	587112
Person 2
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance flight crew : took precautionary avoidance action other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 1000 vertical : 150
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance

Narrative:

Aircraft #1 descending out of 6000 ft for 3000 ft MSL on a cross country IFR flight plan. Aircraft #1 was issued a visual approach by columbus, oh, approach at cmh. (Note: the cmh controller was apparently new to the area and was behind his workload. He asked a transient for the airport identify of bolton field, tzr, his changed destination. Tzr is 1 of the 4 tower operations in central oh. Cmh controller should have known this information.) upon initial contact with osu tower, aircraft #1 was instructed to report high street, which is 2 NM from the runway 27L threshold. Aircraft #2 reported downwind for runway 27L and was cleared to land. Aircraft #1 reported high street seconds earlier. Osu tower instructed aircraft #1 'cleared to land behind traffic.' aircraft #1 was about 135 KTS in the descent at the 2 mi mark. Aircraft #2 was at pattern airspeed. Aircraft #1 did not have aircraft #2 in sight and reported same. No subsequent instruction to either aircraft from tower. Aircraft #2 appeared at 11 O'clock position, at about 1/4 mi and 100-200 ft below aircraft #1 crossing left to right. Aircraft #2 made a comment about aircraft proximity to which tower instructed 'cleared for the option.' aircraft #2 wisely sidestepped to the right of runway 27L and initiated a climb. Aircraft #1 landed normally. Tower apparently did not correctly judge aircraft speeds and position. Tower should have either retracted aircraft #2 landing clearance and extended downwind, or ensured that aircraft #1 had aircraft #2 in sight before issuing landing clearance for aircraft #1. Aircraft #1 should have questioned the landing clearance and spacing. Aircraft #1 should then have offered an evasive maneuver such as a 360 degree turn on final. Aircraft #1 had been in an IFR environment all day and had to mix in with controled VFR during the last mins. Aircraft #1 expected tower to correctly judge the ground speeds of the 2 aircraft which apparently did not happen. Aircraft #2 should have questioned the landing clearance and spacing knowing that aircraft #1 was within 2 NM of landing. Aircraft #2 should then have offered to extend downwind and become 2ND in line for landing.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 PLT CONCERNED WITH APPARENT LACK OF SPACING WITH A PA28 IN THE TFC PATTERN AT OSU.

Narrative: ACFT #1 DSNDING OUT OF 6000 FT FOR 3000 FT MSL ON A XCOUNTRY IFR FLT PLAN. ACFT #1 WAS ISSUED A VISUAL APCH BY COLUMBUS, OH, APCH AT CMH. (NOTE: THE CMH CTLR WAS APPARENTLY NEW TO THE AREA AND WAS BEHIND HIS WORKLOAD. HE ASKED A TRANSIENT FOR THE ARPT IDENT OF BOLTON FIELD, TZR, HIS CHANGED DEST. TZR IS 1 OF THE 4 TWR OPS IN CENTRAL OH. CMH CTLR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THIS INFO.) UPON INITIAL CONTACT WITH OSU TWR, ACFT #1 WAS INSTRUCTED TO RPT HIGH STREET, WHICH IS 2 NM FROM THE RWY 27L THRESHOLD. ACFT #2 RPTED DOWNWIND FOR RWY 27L AND WAS CLRED TO LAND. ACFT #1 RPTED HIGH STREET SECONDS EARLIER. OSU TWR INSTRUCTED ACFT #1 'CLRED TO LAND BEHIND TFC.' ACFT #1 WAS ABOUT 135 KTS IN THE DSCNT AT THE 2 MI MARK. ACFT #2 WAS AT PATTERN AIRSPD. ACFT #1 DID NOT HAVE ACFT #2 IN SIGHT AND RPTED SAME. NO SUBSEQUENT INSTRUCTION TO EITHER ACFT FROM TWR. ACFT #2 APPEARED AT 11 O'CLOCK POS, AT ABOUT 1/4 MI AND 100-200 FT BELOW ACFT #1 XING L TO R. ACFT #2 MADE A COMMENT ABOUT ACFT PROX TO WHICH TWR INSTRUCTED 'CLRED FOR THE OPTION.' ACFT #2 WISELY SIDESTEPPED TO THE R OF RWY 27L AND INITIATED A CLB. ACFT #1 LANDED NORMALLY. TWR APPARENTLY DID NOT CORRECTLY JUDGE ACFT SPDS AND POS. TWR SHOULD HAVE EITHER RETRACTED ACFT #2 LNDG CLRNC AND EXTENDED DOWNWIND, OR ENSURED THAT ACFT #1 HAD ACFT #2 IN SIGHT BEFORE ISSUING LNDG CLRNC FOR ACFT #1. ACFT #1 SHOULD HAVE QUESTIONED THE LNDG CLRNC AND SPACING. ACFT #1 SHOULD THEN HAVE OFFERED AN EVASIVE MANEUVER SUCH AS A 360 DEG TURN ON FINAL. ACFT #1 HAD BEEN IN AN IFR ENVIRONMENT ALL DAY AND HAD TO MIX IN WITH CTLED VFR DURING THE LAST MINS. ACFT #1 EXPECTED TWR TO CORRECTLY JUDGE THE GND SPDS OF THE 2 ACFT WHICH APPARENTLY DID NOT HAPPEN. ACFT #2 SHOULD HAVE QUESTIONED THE LNDG CLRNC AND SPACING KNOWING THAT ACFT #1 WAS WITHIN 2 NM OF LNDG. ACFT #2 SHOULD THEN HAVE OFFERED TO EXTEND DOWNWIND AND BECOME 2ND IN LINE FOR LNDG.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.